&' 



1 



^ 



\ 



Southern Rights and Co-opera- 
tion Documents. 

LETTER FROM 

HON. T. J. WITHERS, 

Addressed to the Committee of Invitation of the Co-opera- 
tion Meeting, held at Yorkville, S. C, on the 6th Aug. 

Camden^ SOih July, 1851. 

Gentlemen : — You must prevail upon the people of York Dis- 
trict to excuse me for declining to appear and address them, as 
I am invited to do. While employed in the Judiciary depart- 
ment of their government, I am dedicated to a very exacting 
and delicate service, best performed by a careful abstinence 
from the heat of partizan bias, and thus giving earnest that I 
seek to maintain the equanimity which warrants a confidence, 
on all hands, that I am to do right to every litigant before me. 
This consideration has no manner of affinity to that pompous 
pretension that would place a Judge above the question of the 
day, (of the greatest gravity in my estimation,) or above the 
people, with whom he must face it ; all ready to do so (I hope) 
with courageous resolution. My notion is, that a true sense of 
propriety (though it reinfoices a long cherished disposition) ad- 
monishes me to shun any temptation that might draw me into 
the vortex of popular commotion. 

In addition to this, my views, upon the matter you are about 
to consider, have been rendered to certain gentlemen of Green- 
ville ; and I suppose the newspaper press has made them acces- 
sible to such of my friends of York as may desire to know what 
they are. I yet adhere to them : and venture to say, that they 
ought to be received as free from guile, whether wise or not ; 
for (save only their unbought good opinfon) what can the peo- 
ple now give me that I could accept 1 Nothing else, I aver, do 
I covet, or ever did. 

From the earliest budding forth of the scheme of giving to 
South Carolina a separate, isolated nationality, I have been an 
unbeliever in its wisdom and efficacy. Except two or three 



v^ 



(who seem not to have recruited disciples of that particular ar- 
ticle of faith,) nobody commends this scheme of solitude as a 
desirable condition in itself We are assured, however, ihat it 
must work out the result of co-operation by other States, in 
like condition with this, in military operations, (if the oc- 
casion should require these,) and ultimately in an organized 
federation; that to this attitude the issues we shall create will 
force our colleagues, by the overwhelming stimulus of inter- 
est and the burning sublimity of pride. 

Gentlemen, beware of that council which teaches you to rely 
upon a friendship — to serve you upon the battle-field, or in 
council — that is procured by duress. Beware, when you per- 
ceive that those who promise it are discarding the admonitions 
of the very equals to whom they are intent upon applying the 
forcing process — that the very hope itself rests upon the Phar- 
isaical presumption, that our colleagues, in a common cause, 
are now beneath or behind us in spirit, or in the knowledge of 
their own rights and duties. Beware of those who assure you 
of the cordial friendship and co-operation of neighbors, by ren- 
dering their commerce, if need be, the prey of privateers, plun- 
dering under the flag and authority of the Independent Nation 
of South-Carolina; of that counsel which, in one breath, lures 
you by the fascinations of plethoric purses, swollen by the con- 
tributions of smuggling, and in the next scouts as ignoble any 
regard for property or life, when the glories of martyrdom 
beckon on the State to an illustrious sacrifice. Too long and 
too often have some of our people heretofore given cause or 
pretext to the Southern States, or some of them, to impute to 
us, in matters of common concern, a temper of domineering ar- 
rogance. At this great crisis, when a mighty common interest 
is at stake, when the foe counts as the sands on the sea-shore, 
when the spirit of aggression is waxing fierce rnough to ad- 
monish us all that it must be met, and can be successfully met 
alone by our whole power, marshalled in concerted organiza- 
tion, let not this small State take one "doubtful step forbidden 
by the advice and judgment of her comrades — let her not yet 
assume, by word or deed, that they are craven, corrupt, or stu- 
pid ; above all, let her not vault into the saddle and usurp the 
whip. 

The main purpose of this letter is to cite your attention to a 
domestic specimen of the forcing process, and its result, now 
in course of exhibition here at home. 

When the Legislature of this State last assembled, the atten- 
tion of the people, as a mass, had been directed alone to the 



combination among the Southern States, aimed at, through the 
agency of a Convention at Nashville. The hope entertained 
from that movement was, 1st, That Congress, then engao-ed 
upon the territorial questions, might be restrained from a threat- 
ened s-«oliation and insult to the South, and an infringement 
upon our rights ; or 2d, failing that, some concerted measure, 
looking to redress and protection, might be commended to the 
several States aggrieved. The scheme of unconccrted disunion 
by . outh-Carolina alone, had then entered into but few heads, 
though it had taken possession of some. When the Convention 
bill was passed, it was assumed, that the temper of the people 
was up, or could be raised, to this line of exalted intensity; not 
from any evidence, I apprehend, given at the polls in October, 
1850, but, probably, from the testimony of newspapers and 
resolutions of Southern Rights Associations. The unsatisfac- 
tory lethargy thought to be discovered in the iXashville Con- 
vention — the disappointment of expectation from Georgia — the 
incipient movements in Mississippi, and, not least, the vehement 
rhetoric of debate, aggravated by a difference between the two 
houses, in the first instance — determined a majority of the Le- 
gislature to adopt a singular measure, which, at one and the 
same time, provided for a representation of this State in a 
Southern Congress, which was courted for concerted co-opera- 
tion, and for a Convention to consider of the recommendations 
of such a Congress, and also — "for the further purpose of taking 
into consideration the general welfare of this State, in view of 
her relations to the laws and government of the United States, 
and thereupon to take care that the CommonweaUh of South- Car- 
olina shall suffer no detriment^ It was further provi (cd, that 
if not called together, by the Governor, prior to the next session, 
in consequence of the action of a Southern Congress, "this Gen- 
eral Assembly shall, by a majority of votes, fix the time for the 
meeting of the said Convention." 

Nothing on the face of this measure, fore-shadowed the iso- 
lated, separate secession of South-Carolina. Certainl}'' some 
members (some of your own, it appears) voted for it with no 
such object in contemplation. The people had never spoken, 
in any intelligible and authoritative manner, on the policy of 
calling the Convention at all — much less on the question of 
what it should do. 

Now we hear it affirmed, that the State is pledged to sepa- 
rate secession through the Convention. Where is the evidence? 
Have a majority of the members of thai body made the pledge? 
I am not aware of it, nor do I believe it. Some of the wisest 



among them have, I know, made no pledge at all. Whoever 
did make any was, in my opinion, not wise in that act — and 
this (very probably) is his own opinion now. Some, as I learn, 
thought (as matter of individual sentiment at the time) that the 
State ought to take final action, but reserved a free vote upon 
the course of policy. Some may have entered the shambles. 
If so, I ask with what propriety? Each political division of 
the State agreed, by the act calling the Convention, with every 
other, that it would send delegates to a Convention to do what? 
To vote the State out of all connexion with everj^ other State 
in the Confederacy? By no means ; but to consider with their 
compeers sent trom other districts, the "general welfare of this 
State," in view of federal relations, and "to take care that the 
Commonwealth of South-Carolina shall suffer no detriment." 
Was this contract faithfully executed by that political body 
which pledged its delegates to vote only for separate secession? 
But no matter what pledges were executed or given — I again 
enquire, what proportion of the voters of this State have en- 
dorsed them? Nobody will deny that a meagre minority only 
voted at the polls, which, in many cases, was itself much divi- 
ded. Did those, who remained at home, acquiesce in the doc- 
trine of separate secession ? Why, it is by no means clear that 
those who carried the election were in favor of that measure, 
or are now. A process of development is now going on which 
will manifest, I think, that a majority of this State are not in 
the position assigned to them by writers and orators on seces- 
sion — that in fact they are neither for separate, isolated inde- 
pendence, nor for abandoning the steady purpose of working 
out, by adequate and practicable means, the salvation of our 
institutions. I remember that, pending the election in Charles- 
ton, a paper of that city accounted on Tuesday morning, for the 
meagre vote of Monday, by reasons of the torrents from the 
clouds on that day — but predicted that the bright sky of Tues- 
day would multiply them amply. The prediction failed. It 
was forthwith announced that so little division of opinion pre- 
vailed in Charleston that there was nothing to arouse the mass. 
How stands the matter now, in that quarter ? 

Certain writers and orators deprecate these developments, 
and charge upon such meetings as you have in view the sin of 
dividing this people into parties. It is my purpose to inquire, 
if this be an iniquity; and if so, who is responsible for it. 

Surely we may affirm, that the members of the Convention 

are not averse to an accurate exposition of the true sentiments 

. and wishes of the public. That, above all things, they need ; 



and they did not derive it from the polls, in February last, un- 
less it be in the emptiest, most technical and uncertain sense. 
Who, then, complain and pray, that there be no strife, no divis- 
ion among us ? Are they not those who contrived a Convention, 
after the mature wisdom of Cheves and Barnwell, had strongly 
admonished against it, and after it had been once defeated in 
the Representatives house, and who ordained the election in 
hot haste ? Are ihey not those who contrived and managed a 
demonstration in May last, in Charleston, which was intended 
to supply thp. deliciences of that election ; to give a favorite 
interpretation lo the rotund language of the Convention bill — 
to the meaning of "general welfare" and the injunction "to take 
care that this Commonwealth shall suffer no detriment," to 
influence the action of a minority Convention in favor of a 
scheme heretofore hidden from the general publjc ; to supply 
(it was hoped) substance — bone, muscle, arteries — to the /b/m 
that had been presented by the election of February ? Have 
they not, then, created the necessity upon those who do not con- 
cur in their commentaries upon language, in their exposition 
of a fact, in their plan of statesmanship or policy, either to ac- 
quiesce in all, while they do not approve or to speak cut ad- 
versely ? 

Is it asked why you did not speak at the polls when you had 
the opportunity? The question can be answered, and it can 
be shown, I think, why a, large majority did not speak at all, 
also why (as I strongly suspect) some of those who did, knew 
not what they spoke. 

The. election for members of the Convention was ordered to 
be held on the second Monday in February and day following — 
held on the heels of the adjournment of the Legislature. The 
act, ordaining it, exhiVjited the object in features comely enough 
— features that the people had been accustomed to contemplate. 
They showed forth a Southern Congress and Convention here 
to aid that body, and to take care that the Commonwealth re- 
ceived no detriment. If a plain man had actually read it, and 
if time had been given to the people to see it, or hear of it, (a 
people who had concurred in the objects and recommendations 
of the Nashville Convention.) there was no word likely to ex- 
cite a suspicion that more was meant than met the eye. I 
doubt if it will be denied by any one who is acquainted with 
the evidence, on the subject, that the early day of election was 
fixed on the following considerations : "mischief will result 
from delay — that is to say, from discussion before the people — 
postponement will allay the fervor of the public heat. Our 



6 

speeches here and the press have raised it to a white heat — 
let us strike while the iron is hot — let us adopt a solemn pro- 
ceeding, which, under a proper management by organized so- 
cieties, shall commit the State before discord shall creep in and 
shake his shaggy locks." 

Well, a few attended the polls. There, raemb rs of organ- 
ized societies were active. The miss of the people were qui- 
escent at home. Many were ignorant that any election was 
going on. None were disposed to do a single act, or say a 
word, that, at home or abroad, could be construed into "aid 
and comfort" to the enem3^ The loudest clamorers against the 
Compromise assumed the function of special patriots ; few of 
the rank and file dreamed of ulterior designs. The strongest 
words, that could be obtained, were extracted from those who 
were set up for candidates and wanted to be elected. The 
election, thus conducted, being finished, a loud shout proceeds 
from an unanimous and a co-operating press, that South-Caro- 
lina had now resolved and appointed her agents accordingly, 
to take that separate station, among her co States "and the rest 
of mankind," to which God and nature had entitled her — that 
others might imitate or not, as they pleased. Even this, the 
great mass of the people, began to hear only when the echo 
was caught up and reverberated by a self-constituted Conven- 
tion in Charleston. 

Having resolved on no such thing, but intent only on what 
the)^ had learned of the poli(;y recommended by the Nashville 
Convention and in the speech there delivered by Mr. Cheves 
(indorsed by our own Senate,) how could it be otherwise, than 
that the people, when roused to look around them, when for the 
first time brought to a knowledge of what has been done and 
what is designed (all said to be ratified under their name and 
authority,) when facetiously told that nobody dreamed of sepa- 
rate secession before the Convention meets — should take the 
liberty ©f defining their own position, and declaring that they 
stand, as yet, where they stood before, upon the platform of the 
Nashville Convention ? If discussion at home comes of this, 
and that dissension be disastrous — to whom will the disaster 
come ? It may, to be sure, fahnfy the prophecies of those who 
never had any right to propliecy. The threats of the self-ap- 
pointed may not be redeemed in the precise man'ier and with 
the vigorous rapidity so congenial to theoretical explorers in 
the unknown of political philosophy. But I have a calm con- 
fidence that no disaster will be worked to the great cause of 
Southern rights and regeneration, if our Convention should for- 
bear secession during its term of life. The attack upon us will 



be too formidable (for however cautious the leaders mean to be 
they can't restrain the purblind zealots in the ranks,) the means 
of resistance are too abundant and obvious, the issue is too mo- 
mentous to lead me to believe that "a tale of submission" will 
ever be written of the slaveholding South. Of one thin"- 1 am 
more certain — it is this — to surprise the people into a great or- 
ganic change, or a revolution, is a very paltry sort of States- 
manship. I have the authority of our own Constitution (which 
I esteem more highly than the figments of any man's brain) to 
say this. 

Did any man who has read it, ever dream, that when one 
entire government was to be pulled down and another construc- 
ted, our course of proceeding should be such, as has been adop- 
ted in this case ? That this rugged journey was to be performed 
by a single bound '? It appears to me, that for a Legislature, 
not elected with reference to such a matter, in view of an en- 
terprise so momentous, conceived for a purpose in which so 
many other States have the same concern, with a hostile lorce 
every where to be found beyond our borders, to call a Conven- 
tion, order the election in some six weeks, declare the object in 
general and ambiguous phrase, must surprise a man who reads 
the eleventh article of our Constitution of 1790. 

It is therein declared, that even that Constitution shall be^ in 
no particular, altered, except by a bill read three times in each 
House of our Legislature, and agreed to by two-thirds of the 
whole representation; and which shall then be published three 
months previous to a new electit n of Representatives ; and 
shall become a part of the Constitution, only when having been 
again read three times in each House, it shall be agreed to by 
two-thirds of the whole representation therein. 

How does the hot haste of the present occasion, when the 
design is said to be to uproot entire fundamental structures and 
reconstruct others, compare with the cool deliberation secured 
to the people and the solemn ratification required of them, be- 
fore the most inconsiderable phrase of our State Constitution 
can be changed ? 

I maintain, therefore, that the people are right to make known 
their opinions by way of instruction to their delegates in Con- 
vention, be those opinions w^hat they may. If unhappy conse- 
quences result, I think I have shewn at whose door they lie. 

I close here, gentlemen, because I wish to abuse your pa- 
tience no longer. 

Your obedient servant, T. J. WITHERS. 

To Messrs. T. J. Bell, W. I. Clawsok, John B. Jackson, York- 
ville, S. C. 



WHAT B®E!S SECESSIOI^ MESISTI 

The Stnte ought to secede. 

Why ? 

Because she has pledged herself to resist ' 

Resist what ? 

The aggressions of the Government. 

"What aggressions ? 

The admission of California with her anti-slavery constitution ; the unjust territo- 
rial bills, and the law abolishing the slave trade in the dis'rict of Columbia. 

Will tiie secession of South-Carolina change the Constitution of California ? 

No. 

Will it place California out of the Union ? 

No. 

Will it give us back the tenitories which were so unjustly taken from us ? 

No. 

Will it repeal the anti-^lave trade law for the District of Columbia ?. 

No. 

What then does it resist ? 

Well, I hardly know what ; but then it looks like resistance, and to go alone, is a 
movement so bold and spirited ! 

If tlie government attempts to coerce us, could we fight it out alone? 

Oh no, we shall have help quick enough. 

Well, if we go out looking for help, where is the boldness of going alone. This 
seems to me like going alone, and not going alone. 

Oh, but we commence the fight alone. 

True, but if we tell our neighbors beforehand, that we look to them for help when 
we get into a tight place, there does not seem to be much boldness in the matter. And 
if we go in peace, where is the biJuness of the step, since it resists notliing? 

But we shall at lea'-t be free then to do as we please. 

Could we then, take our slaves to California, or New Alexico, or Utah? 

No. 

Could we take them to North-Carolina, or Georgia, or Alabama ? 

No. 

If a Georgian or North-Carolinian, marry in South-Carolina, could the father of the 
bride give Lis daughter a negi'o, to take to one of those States ? 

No. 

How then do you say, that we could do as we pleased ? 

Well, I don't know exactly, but still, by secession we show om" resentment, and 
spite those freesoilers. 

Would you biu'n down your own house to show your resentment, and spite your 
enemy ? 

I would not. 

If you were half owner of a house, and the oiher half owner were to occupy more 
than his share, would you show your resentment, by giving him up the whole and 
building another for yourself? 

No, I would not. 

Then if, by secession, we give up all the territories and forts, and our interest in the 
navy and the pubbc buildings, and go out alone to set up for ourselves, 
how do we spite the freesoilers, or how can it be called resistance. This looks to me 
like downright submission ; Mississippi is f r taking back the land, by settling it in 
defiance of the law. But we call tiiat submission, and say, no, let us cut loose and 
leave all, that is resistance. But call it as we please, the world will think that Mis- 
sissippi was right, and we will think so too, when the chai-m breaks. 

Well, may be so, I confess I cannot see how it is, but my leaders say, tibat it is 
brave and heroic, and all that, and so I — ^go it blind. 



«•■ /I /9lk 














-^Ao^ -^ 








-,-r. ■» ■ay d» • 



^j.^ 







,<" 



^ . t • o^ '^ 










v<^^ 



vn^- 










"^o^ 




O 4V 





'^ " f , 1 • ^ 



















^. '■ ^v** «o 






iV«>» 










^* <L^ ^^ •'>'^^\^* V '^ 






'bV" 










iOv\ 





















•^v.^^ 



^^^c,-^' 









;* <L^^ 








V ^y 













'^o^ 



1 > - « • • » *>\ r>^ . » • 




'oK 




'^O^ 



K^°-^ -' 











^Ao^ 





^'^ '"V*^^*\/ %''^'^'/ -^^*.---.^^ 




.^^r 









''>-* S 










iiiliiiiilliillM^^ 












ii ill iiii^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 



